my first layout of a bib
This comes from the reverse engineering department.
My reason for doing it this way is lack of a shop.
What the lumber store had close to building a BIB from
parts that I could pretty much just stick together are:
72 x 12 x 5/8 to 3/4 edge glued pine. These I have to
build one sample BIB.
This butcher block effect means that they prob'ly won't
even need staining. Those are for the sides.
For front baffle, internal fold, back and bottom; 3 each
6 by or 8 by pieces of poplar. The closed end of the cabinet
would be cut off from the third piece and the remainder
would be the fold.
Drivers I have to work with are RS 1197, Fostex FE127e
or a couple of a whole load of Pioneer 4 inchers that were
50 cents each and currently in a line array.
The layout 'looks' the best with 6 inch stock. I used 3/4
masking tape to look at the framing before buying any
more stuff.
Is this doable with the pieces shown? My preference for this
experiment would be to use the RS 1197's. Those were in a PVC
build that had an 81 TL length. Worse case is I try it then knock
down and start over with someone who can give me some saw time.
This comes from the reverse engineering department.
My reason for doing it this way is lack of a shop.
What the lumber store had close to building a BIB from
parts that I could pretty much just stick together are:
72 x 12 x 5/8 to 3/4 edge glued pine. These I have to
build one sample BIB.
This butcher block effect means that they prob'ly won't
even need staining. Those are for the sides.
For front baffle, internal fold, back and bottom; 3 each
6 by or 8 by pieces of poplar. The closed end of the cabinet
would be cut off from the third piece and the remainder
would be the fold.
Drivers I have to work with are RS 1197, Fostex FE127e
or a couple of a whole load of Pioneer 4 inchers that were
50 cents each and currently in a line array.
The layout 'looks' the best with 6 inch stock. I used 3/4
masking tape to look at the framing before buying any
more stuff.
Is this doable with the pieces shown? My preference for this
experiment would be to use the RS 1197's. Those were in a PVC
build that had an 81 TL length. Worse case is I try it then knock
down and start over with someone who can give me some saw time.
So having Madisound ship a pair of Fostex 168ES and Fountek JP-3s, they have been sitting on the shelf for the past 6 months. I have tried the 168ESs in a QWL meant for Silver Flute drivers. They sounded so good, I wonder what they would be like in a BIB.
Nevertheless, I have this feeling that used in an Open Baffle configuration, upwards of 200Hz upto 7KHz, the lows taken care of by a good PA 15"/18" woffer and the highs handed over to the Founteks, the system should handle all kinds of music with great dynamics. O.K. I'll go active all the way.
What do you guys who are so experienced with Single Drivers and BIBs have to say?
Nevertheless, I have this feeling that used in an Open Baffle configuration, upwards of 200Hz upto 7KHz, the lows taken care of by a good PA 15"/18" woffer and the highs handed over to the Founteks, the system should handle all kinds of music with great dynamics. O.K. I'll go active all the way.
What do you guys who are so experienced with Single Drivers and BIBs have to say?
Ray Collins said:
the "nessie" of various sizes which is somewhat similar to BIB in many ways, is kindof a fostex cabinet building instituion for home theatre in japan. so you are thinking perhaps along the right line. the traditional folded horns designs seem more popular in hifi stereo setups. the folded horns represent way more effort, and more worship of music, at least to me.
one thing--while the 168 is very very nice, the 166e is no slouch. the low qts almost demands hardcore acoustic reinforcement. same as 168. I have never built anything out of mdf, but I am having haunting thoughts here...my reccommendation, and it is just a humble opinion, from a quite inexperienced builder is to use nice plywood for them both. no screws, no nails. just glue. course, YMMV
Clark
GM said:
Hi,
hmm, I got 10.5 ft high ceilings. Is there any rule how close the terminus should come to the ceiling for optimum performance?
I understand there's no FR driver around to get there, but maybe a base or so will helps - filled with sand it would also add stability to the cab...
best, LC
p-16s!!!
yay. I think i have finally found a setup here i am happy with. two per horn. one on the internal baffle and one on the back. each centered 10 inches down (symmetric). now I have a real sub woo-ha effect. it is a good balance of reinforcing low bass without dynamically masking the naturally less strong upper bass too bad.
keep in mind that i have 5 inch long panels which are centered in the horn (the peice I cut off the bottom of the internal baffle). these are placed at the very top of the horn. it kinda stifins the structure of the mouth, which would otherwise be the largest unsupported area of the structure. these might also be affecting the sound and the placement of the p-16.
the p-16s also seem to serve to clean up the range lower midrange, upper bass sound in a fairly indescribably subtle way. it is simply easier to listen to. I am not sure what sorts of affects are goin on here. dynamic masking psycologically, as the bass is now louder, or if it is actually taking away unwanted resonances, who knows. coolest part is that to me at least, transients are BETTER which would be the opposite of the affect of using actual damping material. these little peices of plastic are really something else.
there is some seriously low and strong bass coming out of these things. I have no measuring tools but I am quite sure I am into the 20s. using my best judgement there seems to be a bump around 30-40 hz. and a smooth curve from there descending around 3-4-5 db to 90-100hz and then climbing back up to normal level around 150-170hz or so. there are no notes missing from any bass line that has come through so far. the low bass is simply psychadelic. I forget about it all the time. a phrase that comes to mind here that i see on japanese websites is "zero point of sound source" or something to that effect. the bass comes from no where and is everywhere. it can shake your body or move your soul. it is creepy. these are like the best subwoofers i have ever heard attached to some of the best midrange drivers i have ever heard. no doubt, there are compromises here but the performance is simply out of this world, especially considering the price and simplicity of design.
one of the psycological factors here about the BIB for me at least is that it is a very distinct sounding type of horn. the dip is kinda cool sounding to me. I listen to alot of reggae, electronic music, classical, etc. it all just seems to work well. they require - no - seduce you into paying attention to whatever music is coming through.
the tone of the 166es-r I would consider to be of the low and mellow nature, especially when broken in. so the low and mellow quality to the bass sound fits in well here. everything is just sooo relaxing. sooo easy. i love color!
again, soon I will post pictures and whatnot of the construction process. I will attempt to make it somewhat instructional so as we might post it on zilla's website for newbies to learn from. course, I really consider myself a newbie...so we'll see if my instruction is even helpful or not. I really feel that this project is a great introduction to single drivers and horn building for the motivated DIYer. I really am not too active in many of these audio forums. i usually just sit back and take it all in. this project is a very worthy cause to me though, so hence my involvement. philosophically, it debunks alot of preconceived notions about what is possible with a single driver. they are space saving, cheap, fun sounding, cool looking, etc. the compromise is that small dip in upper bass. some people will care. few will care enough to scrap their build.
Clark
yay. I think i have finally found a setup here i am happy with. two per horn. one on the internal baffle and one on the back. each centered 10 inches down (symmetric). now I have a real sub woo-ha effect. it is a good balance of reinforcing low bass without dynamically masking the naturally less strong upper bass too bad.
keep in mind that i have 5 inch long panels which are centered in the horn (the peice I cut off the bottom of the internal baffle). these are placed at the very top of the horn. it kinda stifins the structure of the mouth, which would otherwise be the largest unsupported area of the structure. these might also be affecting the sound and the placement of the p-16.
the p-16s also seem to serve to clean up the range lower midrange, upper bass sound in a fairly indescribably subtle way. it is simply easier to listen to. I am not sure what sorts of affects are goin on here. dynamic masking psycologically, as the bass is now louder, or if it is actually taking away unwanted resonances, who knows. coolest part is that to me at least, transients are BETTER which would be the opposite of the affect of using actual damping material. these little peices of plastic are really something else.
there is some seriously low and strong bass coming out of these things. I have no measuring tools but I am quite sure I am into the 20s. using my best judgement there seems to be a bump around 30-40 hz. and a smooth curve from there descending around 3-4-5 db to 90-100hz and then climbing back up to normal level around 150-170hz or so. there are no notes missing from any bass line that has come through so far. the low bass is simply psychadelic. I forget about it all the time. a phrase that comes to mind here that i see on japanese websites is "zero point of sound source" or something to that effect. the bass comes from no where and is everywhere. it can shake your body or move your soul. it is creepy. these are like the best subwoofers i have ever heard attached to some of the best midrange drivers i have ever heard. no doubt, there are compromises here but the performance is simply out of this world, especially considering the price and simplicity of design.
one of the psycological factors here about the BIB for me at least is that it is a very distinct sounding type of horn. the dip is kinda cool sounding to me. I listen to alot of reggae, electronic music, classical, etc. it all just seems to work well. they require - no - seduce you into paying attention to whatever music is coming through.
the tone of the 166es-r I would consider to be of the low and mellow nature, especially when broken in. so the low and mellow quality to the bass sound fits in well here. everything is just sooo relaxing. sooo easy. i love color!
again, soon I will post pictures and whatnot of the construction process. I will attempt to make it somewhat instructional so as we might post it on zilla's website for newbies to learn from. course, I really consider myself a newbie...so we'll see if my instruction is even helpful or not. I really feel that this project is a great introduction to single drivers and horn building for the motivated DIYer. I really am not too active in many of these audio forums. i usually just sit back and take it all in. this project is a very worthy cause to me though, so hence my involvement. philosophically, it debunks alot of preconceived notions about what is possible with a single driver. they are space saving, cheap, fun sounding, cool looking, etc. the compromise is that small dip in upper bass. some people will care. few will care enough to scrap their build.
Clark
Outstanding effort and work, Clark, nice to hear my impressions mirrored by others.
I particularly like the comment about bass from everywhere, and nowhere. Exactly. Scottmoose and I built BIB's last year at the same time, and immediately heard something identical to dipole bass. It is too good to be true, a bonus almost beyond belief. The 168Sigmae will easily pass the Flecktones Test, in the Bass Dept. Use of 6 inch wideband drivers for fretless jazz bass is not krazy at all. I also hear the into the 20's lines. It makes me think that unless one has a pretty damn big room, the 8 inch BIB load is overkill.
I look forward to the photo sequences, and again great work on the BIB site, Jeff, et al
I particularly like the comment about bass from everywhere, and nowhere. Exactly. Scottmoose and I built BIB's last year at the same time, and immediately heard something identical to dipole bass. It is too good to be true, a bonus almost beyond belief. The 168Sigmae will easily pass the Flecktones Test, in the Bass Dept. Use of 6 inch wideband drivers for fretless jazz bass is not krazy at all. I also hear the into the 20's lines. It makes me think that unless one has a pretty damn big room, the 8 inch BIB load is overkill.
I look forward to the photo sequences, and again great work on the BIB site, Jeff, et al
>>> one of the psycological factors here about the BIB for me at least is that it is a very distinct sounding type of horn.
Interesting...
>>> everything is just sooo relaxing. sooo easy. i love color!
Me too!
>>> bass from everywhere, and nowhere...
I gotta build me a BIB!
>>> I look forward to the photo sequences, and again great work on the BIB site, Jeff, et al.
My pleasure! More designs to come soon!
blumenco, please send me your pics when you get a chance. I would love to see them.
godzilla3@hotmail.com
Peace,
Godzilla
Interesting...
>>> everything is just sooo relaxing. sooo easy. i love color!
Me too!
>>> bass from everywhere, and nowhere...
I gotta build me a BIB!
>>> I look forward to the photo sequences, and again great work on the BIB site, Jeff, et al.
My pleasure! More designs to come soon!
blumenco, please send me your pics when you get a chance. I would love to see them.
godzilla3@hotmail.com
Peace,
Godzilla
I received my pair of FR125s yesterday (cute little buggers, aren't they?), and I'm game for trying them in a BIB. I'm confused on a few points, can you all help straighten me out?
When GM says "SO, SL = same as the original", does SL=Sm? And "original" means TC's post on the fullrange site, where Sm = 55 in^2?
On Zilla's How to build a BIB page, Z driver is described as "distance of driver-centre to top end of cabinet". Lower on the same page, it says "So = Length from sealed end top of cabinet to driver center". I had thought that So was the area of the sealed end of the line (essentially zero in a BIB). What did I miss?
If I have it right, a BIB with internal dimensions of 5 x 11 at the mouth x 61.5" tall, with the driver center 23.5" below the top should work. Or something with similar proportions adjusted to fit the available lumber. Is that too short a line to properly load an 8' ceiling?
Since Baltic Birch doesn't come in sheets that long, and I don't have a planer to allow me to use raw 5/4 lumber, I'm thinking of using 3/4" laminated (edge glued) stain grade pine, which is available in nice flat six foot long pieces at the local Lowe's. Would a dowel or two across the open area of the mouth for bracing the large sides do more harm than good?
Many thanks to all those useful contributors whose coattails I'm happy to follow!
lousymusician said:
Yes.
lousymusician said:
Nothing. You are quite correct: So is the area of the sealed end, nothing more. I've mentioned that to Jeff, but he hasn't had time to correct it yet. Actually, to be really pedantic, Zdriver should read 'Distance of driver centre to the sealed end' rather than 'top,' but as we're only playing with trad BIBs here, it isn't massively critical.
lousymusician said:
No, you'll still get some loading. Not massive, but enough to kill the worst of the ripple -remember the rear walls of the corner help here too.
lousymusician said:
It'll technically turn it into an MLTL. That might not necessarily be a bad thing. I'd try first, and if it needs the extra bracing, add it afterward. I gather TC rates pine BTW, so you could be onto a good thing here.
One thing about the FR125 that I've gathered is that its Fs is a bit of a mystery. Dave, what's the definitive on the CSS?
Best
Scott
Sorry ppl, this is a repeat of the post on the previous page. Everytime I have asked something on these lines, the post has been lost among other ideas.
So anyone?
So having Madisound ship a pair of Fostex 168ES and Fountek JP-3s, they have been sitting on the shelf for the past 6 months. I have tried the 168ESs in a QWL meant for Silver Flute drivers. They sounded so good, I wonder what they would be like in a BIB.
Nevertheless, I have this feeling that used in an Open Baffle configuration, upwards of 200Hz upto 7KHz, the lows taken care of by a good PA 15"/18" woffer and the highs handed over to the Founteks, the system should handle all kinds of music with great dynamics. O.K. I'll go active all the way.
What do you guys who are so experienced with Single Drivers and BIBs have to say?
So anyone?
So having Madisound ship a pair of Fostex 168ES and Fountek JP-3s, they have been sitting on the shelf for the past 6 months. I have tried the 168ESs in a QWL meant for Silver Flute drivers. They sounded so good, I wonder what they would be like in a BIB.
Nevertheless, I have this feeling that used in an Open Baffle configuration, upwards of 200Hz upto 7KHz, the lows taken care of by a good PA 15"/18" woffer and the highs handed over to the Founteks, the system should handle all kinds of music with great dynamics. O.K. I'll go active all the way.
What do you guys who are so experienced with Single Drivers and BIBs have to say?
I've got a pair of Lowther DX3...
Has anyone tried building a box for these guys???
If not, what size etc etc.
I'm really good with a table saw, clamps and a spray gun but when it comes to speaker calcs... Definietly Not my strong suit. So if you might be willing to do the numbers, I will very carefully document the entire build with photos etc.
My Lowthers are currently living in an Abby knockoff plus or minus
Phil Townsend
Santa Fe
Has anyone tried building a box for these guys???
If not, what size etc etc.
I'm really good with a table saw, clamps and a spray gun but when it comes to speaker calcs... Definietly Not my strong suit. So if you might be willing to do the numbers, I will very carefully document the entire build with photos etc.
My Lowthers are currently living in an Abby knockoff plus or minus
Phil Townsend
Santa Fe
Scottmoose said:
That's my fault. I thought the "sealed end" could be mistaken with the sealed end of the cabinet, which is the bottom. But you are absolutely right to be pedantic Scott - music is art but audio is engeneering, and so the "How To..." should to be as correct as pssible. I will email a fixed drawing to Jeff for easy drop in replacement.
I'm not Dave, but CSS says Fs = 67 Hz, messurements taken by two DIY Magazines say it's 44 - 47 Hz. I have these drivers in a 12L BR cabinet tuned to ca. 45 Hz and from what I'm hearing with my test CD, compared to Simulations with both TSPs, I believe the thruth is somewhere in the middle.
About BIB length and ceiling height, is there a rule of thumb or some formular, that would help us figure out what distance from top end of the BIB to the ceiling gives the optimum performance?
best, LC
Re: I've got a pair of Lowther DX3...
Er, I'm not sure what you want us to say. That's two completely different approaches. Both have merits. The advantages of dipoles over most box speakers are sufficiently well documented to require no further extrapolation on my part at least (especially given that Martin now has a spectacular OB worksheet available). Disadvantages are that they'll take up more space, cost more, require a crossover / active Eq etc. compared to the horn, which will do it all from one driver, although perhaps not as 'accurately'. The Sig in the BIB is a stunner from what Dan and TC himself say, and these cabs do provide some similar effects to a well-done dipole, particularly in the bass regions, which is nicely room-filling. Up to you really. Sorry, but there's not a lot else I can really say until you state what it is you're ultimately hoping to achieve!
Not yet. I've some in the pipeline that I'm corresponding with Greg about, for both the 8in and smaller Lowther units. They're being a bit of a pain at present to get the best out of. Give us a few days and we'll have something worth building.
Best
Scott
Samuel Jayaraj said:
Er, I'm not sure what you want us to say. That's two completely different approaches. Both have merits. The advantages of dipoles over most box speakers are sufficiently well documented to require no further extrapolation on my part at least (especially given that Martin now has a spectacular OB worksheet available). Disadvantages are that they'll take up more space, cost more, require a crossover / active Eq etc. compared to the horn, which will do it all from one driver, although perhaps not as 'accurately'. The Sig in the BIB is a stunner from what Dan and TC himself say, and these cabs do provide some similar effects to a well-done dipole, particularly in the bass regions, which is nicely room-filling. Up to you really. Sorry, but there's not a lot else I can really say until you state what it is you're ultimately hoping to achieve!
Phil Townsend said:
Not yet. I've some in the pipeline that I'm corresponding with Greg about, for both the 8in and smaller Lowther units. They're being a bit of a pain at present to get the best out of. Give us a few days and we'll have something worth building.
Best
Scott
Hello all,
I just stumbled on this thread today (and this site). I have used the old 168S for many previous projects and ended up with a couple of AER MK1 drivers a few years ago as well.
The best I have managed to get to so far is an OB design with the AER's, adding two Seas CA25FEY drivers (separate amp and active filter) in the baffle to help with bass. Being an engineer though, I am a varm believer in keeping things simple, so to do away with the bass drivers and use the AER's for everything has been my goal from the begining, but I have never succeded.
Based on all the comments so far, this seems to be a possible solution, extend the response without giving up the fantastic mid/high from the OB design.
I have looked for a simulation / optimization SW to see what dimensions I would need and what response I could expect, is this available? The AER MK 1 parameters are:
Frequency response +/- 2.5dB 20 Hz - 21 kHz
Voice coil impedance (nominal) 16 ohm
Nominal impedance 16 ohm
Nominal Power Handling 100W
Air gap width 1 mm
Flux density 1.9 Tesla
Diaphragm Twin-paper
Nominal air resonance 38.1 Hz
Sensitivity at 1m/1kHz/1Watt 102.5 db
Maximum voice coil travel �} 1 mm
Total Q Factor 0.40
Electrical Q Factor 0.42
Mechanical Q Factor 6.22
Equivalent Volume Suspension 74 litre
Bl 9.5 N/A
L(vc) 1.55mH
Greatfull for any help or pointer in the right direction.
Thanks / Peter
I just stumbled on this thread today (and this site). I have used the old 168S for many previous projects and ended up with a couple of AER MK1 drivers a few years ago as well.
The best I have managed to get to so far is an OB design with the AER's, adding two Seas CA25FEY drivers (separate amp and active filter) in the baffle to help with bass. Being an engineer though, I am a varm believer in keeping things simple, so to do away with the bass drivers and use the AER's for everything has been my goal from the begining, but I have never succeded.
Based on all the comments so far, this seems to be a possible solution, extend the response without giving up the fantastic mid/high from the OB design.
I have looked for a simulation / optimization SW to see what dimensions I would need and what response I could expect, is this available? The AER MK 1 parameters are:
Frequency response +/- 2.5dB 20 Hz - 21 kHz
Voice coil impedance (nominal) 16 ohm
Nominal impedance 16 ohm
Nominal Power Handling 100W
Air gap width 1 mm
Flux density 1.9 Tesla
Diaphragm Twin-paper
Nominal air resonance 38.1 Hz
Sensitivity at 1m/1kHz/1Watt 102.5 db
Maximum voice coil travel �} 1 mm
Total Q Factor 0.40
Electrical Q Factor 0.42
Mechanical Q Factor 6.22
Equivalent Volume Suspension 74 litre
Bl 9.5 N/A
L(vc) 1.55mH
Greatfull for any help or pointer in the right direction.
Thanks / Peter
The Collegium:
I have selected the FE168ESigma and will build the enclosure using 3/4" Baltic birch plywood. Please critique my dimensions for errors as well as suggest any changes you deem appropriate.
FE168E Sigma BIB
L=128" So=25.5" Sm=74.25"
Front Baffle Width and Depth
Assume 8" wide baffle Depth= 74.25 / 8 = 9.28" or 9.25"
8" X 9.25" will be the Width X Depth.
Height
Height= 128" / 2= 64"
or
Heigh: 128" - (9.25"(depth)/ 2) = 4.625"
128" - 4.625" = 123.375"
123.375" / 2 = 61.6875"
Should I use the simple 64" height or the internal baffle adjusted 61.6875" height?
Internal Baffel
Internal baffel centered 4.625" from bottom, front, and back.
I have selected the FE168ESigma and will build the enclosure using 3/4" Baltic birch plywood. Please critique my dimensions for errors as well as suggest any changes you deem appropriate.
FE168E Sigma BIB
L=128" So=25.5" Sm=74.25"
Front Baffle Width and Depth
Assume 8" wide baffle Depth= 74.25 / 8 = 9.28" or 9.25"
8" X 9.25" will be the Width X Depth.
Height
Height= 128" / 2= 64"
or
Heigh: 128" - (9.25"(depth)/ 2) = 4.625"
128" - 4.625" = 123.375"
123.375" / 2 = 61.6875"
Should I use the simple 64" height or the internal baffle adjusted 61.6875" height?
Internal Baffel
Internal baffel centered 4.625" from bottom, front, and back.
I'd use the 64in height. It's so close it'll make no difference. Re the dims, I'd suggest going with a terminus area 6 3/4in wide x 11in deep (internal), which gives the exact area. That's what I used for the sim.
The Vas on the AERs looks a bit too hefty to me to be ideal for this load. It'll work, but you'll likely end up with a gigantic enclosure. Probably better ways of doing it.
Best
Scott
The Vas on the AERs looks a bit too hefty to me to be ideal for this load. It'll work, but you'll likely end up with a gigantic enclosure. Probably better ways of doing it.
Best
Scott